Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to Verizon

[SMS]

Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to
Verizon
April 1, 2006, 9:22 AM source: APN

John Nayas, who has gained a reputation on Usenet newsgroups as the most
dishonest poster of the 21st century, announced today that he's turning
over a new leaf, and from now on will post only verifiable facts. Nayas
stated, "It was fun being the devils advocate, but I think that people
got tired of of me posting incorrect information day, after day...it
just got really old."

Nayas, who's become famous for his content-free responses when he's
unable to counter referenced facts, said that he apologizes for his
habit of posting one-liners consisting of "Rubbish," "Nonsense," "Good
Scramble," "Not True," etc., when backed into a corner. "It was
childish," he admitted, "I've grown up and will now gracefully admit my
mistakes."

When asked why he's been defending Cingular for so many years, almost
always with false statements, he simply shrugged and stated, "I felt bad
for them, I always root for the underdog. Cingular entered the wireless
game very late in my area, they got stuck with 1900 Mhz, and they
finally had to buy AT&T Wireless in order to solve their coverage
problems. They constantly get hammered in all the independent surveys of
cellular coverage and quality. Someone had to make up stories to counter
the facts, and I took on that responsibility."

Nayas confirmed that he is changing his wireless carrier from Cingular
to Verizon, because he's had no Cingular coverage at his home for the
past 6 years, "I put on a good show, and fooled a lot of people, but I'm
tired of having to drive three miles in order to make a call." He
continued, "people always get my voice mail, and think that my phone is
off, but in reality I'm home, and I have to retrieve my Cingular voice
mail from my land-line. Verizon has great coverage at my house, and I'll
finally be able to use my phone on my sailboat."

Nayas also admitted that in reality he's a Democrat, and that believes
in open competition. He secretly deplored the 2005 FCC decision to
eliminate competition in the DSL market, and he is lobbying the FCC to
rescind their August 2005 decision. Nayas stated: "I used to always link
to studies from the Hoover Institution, until someone informed me about
their political bias, and their connections to big business. Wow! I was
surprised, as I've had nothing but good service from their cleaning
appliances."

Nayas also promised to fix his Cingular FAQ on Wikipedia, which contains
hundreds of incorrect statements.

[jc]

Post by SMS
Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to
Verizon
April 1, 2006, 9:22 AM source: APN
John Nayas, who has gained a reputation on Usenet newsgroups as the most
dishonest poster of the 21st century, announced today that he's turning
over a new leaf, and from now on will post only verifiable facts. Nayas
stated, "It was fun being the devils advocate, but I think that people
got tired of of me posting incorrect information day, after day...it
just got really old."
Nayas, who's become famous for his content-free responses when he's
unable to counter referenced facts, said that he apologizes for his
habit of posting one-liners consisting of "Rubbish," "Nonsense," "Good
Scramble," "Not True," etc., when backed into a corner. "It was
childish," he admitted, "I've grown up and will now gracefully admit my
mistakes."
When asked why he's been defending Cingular for so many years, almost
always with false statements, he simply shrugged and stated, "I felt bad
for them, I always root for the underdog. Cingular entered the wireless
game very late in my area, they got stuck with 1900 Mhz, and they
finally had to buy AT&T Wireless in order to solve their coverage
problems. They constantly get hammered in all the independent surveys of
cellular coverage and quality. Someone had to make up stories to counter
the facts, and I took on that responsibility."
Nayas confirmed that he is changing his wireless carrier from Cingular
to Verizon, because he's had no Cingular coverage at his home for the
past 6 years, "I put on a good show, and fooled a lot of people, but I'm
tired of having to drive three miles in order to make a call." He
continued, "people always get my voice mail, and think that my phone is
off, but in reality I'm home, and I have to retrieve my Cingular voice
mail from my land-line. Verizon has great coverage at my house, and I'll
finally be able to use my phone on my sailboat."
Nayas also admitted that in reality he's a Democrat, and that believes
in open competition. He secretly deplored the 2005 FCC decision to
eliminate competition in the DSL market, and he is lobbying the FCC to
rescind their August 2005 decision. Nayas stated: "I used to always link
to studies from the Hoover Institution, until someone informed me about
their political bias, and their connections to big business. Wow! I was
surprised, as I've had nothing but good service from their cleaning
appliances."
Nayas also promised to fix his Cingular FAQ on Wikipedia, which contains
hundreds of incorrect statements.

you guy's are Funny
the best
better than XM comedy
thanks

[Tinman]

Post by jc

Post by SMS
Nayas also promised to fix his Cingular FAQ on Wikipedia, which contains
hundreds of incorrect statements.

you guy's are Funny
the best
better than XM comedy

Watching someone disintegrate due to Alzheimer's is not really funny.
It's pathetic.

Repeatedly stating the same incorrect information, forgetting which
thread one was last eviscerated in, ignoring basic laws of physics,
"forgetting" about large swaths of the Bay area, disregarding Occam's
Razor (not a pun!) in favor of convoluted "user error" theories--all the
signs were there. OK, maybe in this case it was funny.

It's only a matter of time before his accurate-to-a-micro-millimeter GPS
leads him to Gilligan's Island (in search of the only Cingular coverage
hole). One can only hope his visit lasts longer than the series...

Have a nice day!

[Strongbox]

Post by SMS
Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to
Verizon
April 1, 2006, 9:22 AM source: APN
John Nayas, who has gained a reputation on Usenet newsgroups as the most
dishonest poster of the 21st century, announced today that he's turning
over a new leaf, and from now on will post only verifiable facts. Nayas
stated, "It was fun being the devils advocate, but I think that people
got tired of of me posting incorrect information day, after day...it
just got really old."

If you're going to make up stuff, at least get the guy's name right. It's
NAVAS.

[Tinman]

Post by Strongbox

Post by SMS
Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to
Verizon
April 1, 2006, 9:22 AM source: APN
John Nayas, who has gained a reputation on Usenet newsgroups as the most
dishonest poster of the 21st century, announced today that he's turning
over a new leaf, and from now on will post only verifiable facts. Nayas
stated, "It was fun being the devils advocate, but I think that people
got tired of of me posting incorrect information day, after day...it
just got really old."

If you're going to make up stuff, at least get the guy's name right. It's
NAVAS.

Wow, you are a freakin' genius! Or not.

<whoosh>

[SMS]

NTP Backs Out of RIM Settlement, wants more money

Details at "http://www.phonescoop.com/"

[Jeff Liebermann]

Post by SMS
NTP Backs Out of RIM Settlement, wants more money
Details at "http://www.phonescoop.com/"

Click on the "full story" link.

[SMS]

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by SMS
NTP Backs Out of RIM Settlement, wants more money
Details at "http://www.phonescoop.com/"

Click on the "full story" link.

Well of course you have to do this. I didn't want to give away the joke!

[DecaturTxCowboy]

Post by Strongbox
If you're going to make up stuff, at least get the guy's name right. It's
NAVAS.

Check you Sunday newspaper supplement for discount coupons for the Clue
Store.

[Notan]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Strongbox
If you're going to make up stuff, at least get the guy's name right. It's
NAVAS.

Check you Sunday newspaper supplement for discount coupons for the Clue
Store.

For whatever reason, the Sunday Supplement came with today's paper,
but was labeled, "Friday's Supplement."

It's all *very* confusing.

Notan

[Scott]

Post by SMS
Nayas Admits Errors, Promises to Be Honest Going Forward, Switches to
Verizon
April 1, 2006, 9:22 AM source: APN

Happy April Fool's Day to you, too, Steve.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack? NTP vs. RIM? Cingular GSM migration? Some other wild
claim? All of the above? :)

[Tinman]

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!

==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...
"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db"
==========================================

You are at least useful for entertainment value, John. Really, you
should go into comedy or something...

Have a nice day.

[SMS]

Post by Tinman
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!
==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...
"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db"
==========================================
You are at least useful for entertainment value, John. Really, you
should go into comedy or something...

Radio Shack is closing 480 stores, their stock has been downgraded
because of the loss of Verizon wireless sales, and has hit a 52 week
low. No way to spin this into something positive, but I expect that
he'll try.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Tinman
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!
==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...
"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db"
==========================================
You are at least useful for entertainment value, John. Really, you
should go into comedy or something...

Radio Shack is closing 480 stores, their stock has been downgraded
because of the loss of Verizon wireless sales, and has hit a 52 week
low. No way to spin this into something positive, but I expect that
he'll try.

Hardly positive. Radio is the victim of its own mismanagement, and is on a
long downhill slide. As shown in my other response here, problems stem in
part from poor sales of *Verizon* in *2005*. Switching to Cingular is
actually part of the turnaround plan. No matter how you try to spin it.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Post by John Navas
Switching to Cingular is
actually part of the turnaround plan. No matter how you try to spin it.

I had a funny thing happen to my while buying some parts at the Scotts
Valley Radio Shock store on Saturday. I was looking at the broshures
for Nextel-Sprint, trying to decode the coverage area maps and service
offers. The sales person shuffles up and asks if I need assistance
and without missing a beat, offers to shove me in the direction of the
Cingular display. I indicated that I wasn't interested in Cingular
and wanted to see if Nextel-Sprint had coverage in my area. I knew
that it did not, but wanted to see if there were any plans on the
maps. So, I asked about coverage in San Lorenzo Valley, and was told
that Cingular covers that area quite well. I again indicated that I
wasn't interested in Cingular and asked what was their problem with
Nextel-Sprint. The answer was something like "Doesn't matter because
Cingular is better".

My crystal ball tells me that not only are there problems selling
Verizon, but Nextel-Sprint may shortly follow. Please treat this as
one of my anecdotal rumors.

Incidentally, the junk flush cutting diagonal cutters I purchased for
$5 were dull out of the box. They couldn't even cut CAT5 wires
without mushrooming the ends. I had to file an edge, but it was dull
after about 10 cuts. Not even hardened steel. The previous model
flush cutters were much better, sharp, and cheaper.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by John Navas
Switching to Cingular is
actually part of the turnaround plan. No matter how you try to spin it.

I had a funny thing happen to my while buying some parts at the Scotts
Valley Radio Shock store on Saturday. I was looking at the broshures
for Nextel-Sprint, trying to decode the coverage area maps and service
offers. The sales person shuffles up and asks if I need assistance
and without missing a beat, offers to shove me in the direction of the
Cingular display. I indicated that I wasn't interested in Cingular
and wanted to see if Nextel-Sprint had coverage in my area. I knew
that it did not, but wanted to see if there were any plans on the
maps. So, I asked about coverage in San Lorenzo Valley, and was told
that Cingular covers that area quite well. I again indicated that I
wasn't interested in Cingular and asked what was their problem with
Nextel-Sprint. The answer was something like "Doesn't matter because
Cingular is better".
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there problems selling
Verizon, but Nextel-Sprint may shortly follow. Please treat this as
one of my anecdotal rumors.

You're actually right on the money -- Sprint-Nextel have also been
disappointing for Radio Shack:

<http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060112/radioshack_outlook.html?.v=3>

The retailer expected its Verizon sales to dip but was disappointed that
sales of Sprint phones, which it heavily promoted, didn't rise enough to
make up the difference.

<http://www.mobilemodo.com/archives/2006/01/radioshack_wireless_sales_drop.html>

Sprint's merger with Nextel last August evidently did not provide the big
increase in sales that they both were expecting.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
You're actually right on the money -- Sprint-Nextel have also been

Now. let me get this right- when anecdotal informarmation is posted that
fits your childish agenda it is acceptable, but anything else is immediately
dismissed by you. How hypocritical.

The fact that Sprint-Nextel coverage was not available in the area asked
about is something that a good salesperson would have known. The story,
while quite charming, comes far from proving anything. But go ahead, John-
please feel free to look like a fool any time.

[SMS]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

Post by Jeff Liebermann
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there problems selling
Verizon

? I think you meant Cingular.

Post by Jeff Liebermann
but Nextel-Sprint may shortly follow. Please treat this as
one of my anecdotal rumors.

I worked with a lady that lived in the Seven Springs area of Cupertino.
She told met that she'd had Sprint for like many years, and it never
worked at her house. Sprint coverage is marginal in many parts of the
Bay Area because they are all 1900 Mhz which requires more towers to
cover a given area, and penetrates less well into buildings. My old boss
got out of his Sprint contract with no termination fee because he had no
coverage at his house.

The article about Radio Shack's problems selling Cingular did mention
that the problem varied by region.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
<snip>

Post by Jeff Liebermann
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there problems selling
Verizon

? I think you meant Cingular.

Post by Jeff Liebermann
but Nextel-Sprint may shortly follow. Please treat this as
one of my anecdotal rumors.

I worked with a lady that lived in the Seven Springs area of Cupertino.
She told met that she'd had Sprint for like many years, and it never
worked at her house. Sprint coverage is marginal in many parts of the
Bay Area because they are all 1900 Mhz which requires more towers to
cover a given area, and penetrates less well into buildings. My old boss
got out of his Sprint contract with no termination fee because he had no
coverage at his house.
The article about Radio Shack's problems selling Cingular did mention
that the problem varied by region.

Complete fantasy.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
Complete fantasy.

Something you are quite familiar with, as most of your posts would fall into
this category.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Post by SMS

Post by Jeff Liebermann
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there problems selling
Verizon

? I think you meant Cingular.

No, I meant Verizon. See:
| http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/aug2005/pi2005089_9366_pi036.htm
| http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050801

"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in opposite directions
as it relates to wireless-communications sales," said Lowell
McAdam, chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a written
statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to continue the
relationship given the high cost of this channel relative to other
distribution channels and our insistence that growth and profit be
balanced."

Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on Verizon and
Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note the optimistic outlook
sections). RS split with Verizon because they could get a better
piece of the action from Sprint and Cingular.

[Quick]

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by SMS

Post by Jeff Liebermann
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there
problems selling Verizon

? I think you meant Cingular.

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/aug2005/pi2005089_9366_pi036.ht
m

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by SMS
http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050801

"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in
opposite directions as it relates to
wireless-communications sales," said Lowell McAdam,
chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a
written statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to
continue the relationship given the high cost of this
channel relative to other distribution channels and
our insistence that growth and profit be balanced."
Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on
Verizon and Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note
the optimistic outlook sections). RS split with Verizon
because they could get a better piece of the action from
Sprint and Cingular.

So that sounds like VZW dropped RS as a channel partner. It
sounds like VZW was willing to pay the higher costs of using
RS as a channel until they grew enough that it was no longer
worth the cost for the added growth?

-Quick

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by SMS

Post by Jeff Liebermann
My crystal ball tells me that not only are there
problems selling Verizon

? I think you meant Cingular.

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/aug2005/pi2005089_9366_pi036.ht
m

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by SMS
http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050801

"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in
opposite directions as it relates to
wireless-communications sales," said Lowell McAdam,
chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a
written statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to
continue the relationship given the high cost of this
channel relative to other distribution channels and
our insistence that growth and profit be balanced."
Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on
Verizon and Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note
the optimistic outlook sections). RS split with Verizon
because they could get a better piece of the action from
Sprint and Cingular.

So that sounds like VZW dropped RS as a channel partner. It
sounds like VZW was willing to pay the higher costs of using
RS as a channel until they grew enough that it was no longer
worth the cost for the added growth?

Most accounts are that Radio Shack dumped Verizon, not the other way around:

"RadioShack Dumps Verizon, Adds Cingular"
<http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/radioshack.html>

"RadioShack dumps Verizon for Cingular"
<http://www.mobiletracker.net/archives/2005/08/01/radioshack-cingular>

"Radio Shack To Ditch Verizon for Cingular"
<http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=1307>

"Radioshack Dumps Verizon for Cingular"
<http://www.firstadopter.com/fa/archives/001155.html>

"RadioShack Dials Into Cingular, Sprint, Nextel, and Hangs Up On Verizon"
<http://www.techweb.com/wire/networking/166404265>

[GomJabbar]

Verizon was one of Radio Shacks products. As such, it would be more
appropriate to say in a headline that Radio Shack dumped one of it's
products, rather than the product dumped Radio Shack. I doubt if
Verizon wanted to reduce it's in-store presence, but I can see that
Verizon might have gotten greedy (or Radio Shack could have gotten
greedy) regarding the markup they would allow Radio Shack (and keep
Radio Shack competitive selling Verizon in the marketplace - or in
other words make the shelf space in Radio Shack worth it to Radio Shack
to keep selling Verizon).

So saying that Radio Shack dumped Verizon in a headline may not tell
the real story.

[Philip J. Koenig]

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:13:43 GMT, in article <XnmYf.51577$2O6.38651
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, Quick writes...

Post by Jeff Liebermann
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/aug2005/pi2005089_9366_pi036.ht
m

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by Jeff Liebermann
http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050801

"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in
opposite directions as it relates to
wireless-communications sales," said Lowell McAdam,
chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a
written statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to
continue the relationship given the high cost of this
channel relative to other distribution channels and
our insistence that growth and profit be balanced."
Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on
Verizon and Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note
the optimistic outlook sections). RS split with Verizon
because they could get a better piece of the action from
Sprint and Cingular.

So that sounds like VZW dropped RS as a channel partner. It
sounds like VZW was willing to pay the higher costs of using
RS as a channel until they grew enough that it was no longer
worth the cost for the added growth?

Either that or Verizon (like many corporations) is just trying
to spin a bad situation as positive, to lessen the negative
PR impact.

[Rico]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:13:43 GMT, in article <XnmYf.51577$2O6.38651
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, Quick writes...

Post by Jeff Liebermann
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/aug2005/pi2005089_9366_pi036.ht
m

Post by Jeff Liebermann

Post by Jeff Liebermann
http://www.smartmoney.com/onedaywonder/index.cfm?story=20050801

"Verizon Wireless and RadioShack are moving in
opposite directions as it relates to
wireless-communications sales," said Lowell McAdam,
chief operating officer of Verizon Wireless, in a
written statement Monday. "It no longer made sense to
continue the relationship given the high cost of this
channel relative to other distribution channels and
our insistence that growth and profit be balanced."
Note that it's from about 6 months ago. The comments on
Verizon and Radio shack revenue is interesting. (Note
the optimistic outlook sections). RS split with Verizon
because they could get a better piece of the action from
Sprint and Cingular.

So that sounds like VZW dropped RS as a channel partner. It
sounds like VZW was willing to pay the higher costs of using
RS as a channel until they grew enough that it was no longer
worth the cost for the added growth?

Either that or Verizon (like many corporations) is just trying
to spin a bad situation as positive, to lessen the negative
PR impact.

I can't imagine Verizon cares one way or 'ther what happens to Radio Shack.
What I wonder is if AT&T when the bellsouth aquisition is complete will set
eyes on the last baby of significance. Also this one would be a parlay into
Europe.

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Rico

Post by Philip J. Koenig
On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:13:43 GMT, in article <XnmYf.51577$2O6.38651
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, Quick writes...
Either that or Verizon (like many corporations) is just trying
to spin a bad situation as positive, to lessen the negative
PR impact.

I can't imagine Verizon cares one way or 'ther what happens to Radio Shack.

Say what? Radio Shack is probably the biggest cellular distribution operation
in the USA. Replacing those sales won't be easy.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
Say what? Radio Shack is probably the biggest cellular distribution operation
in the USA. Replacing those sales won't be easy.

Not even close. Try again and use facts this time. Can you say
Brightpoint?

[SMS]

Post by Scott
Not even close. Try again and use facts this time. Can you say
Brightpoint?

Remember that much of Radio Shacks business was in contract renewal, not
in new sales. And even when it was in new sales, the customer had
already decided which carrier to go with, and was simply looking for the
best deal, or the most convenient location at which to buy.

The sales that Verizon lost are the ones where the Radio Shack sales
person is able to convince the customer to change carriers away from
Verizon, over to Sprint or Cingular, or the rare new wireless customer.

No doubt that Verizon would have more net additions with Radio Shack
than without it. But the cost of these additions was not worth acceding
to Radio Shacks demands.

Furthermore, as Radio Shack continues to close stores, their value as
channel decreases. They're closing 480 stores this year, a little less
than 10% of their company-owned stores.

[Javier]

Post by SMS

Post by Scott
Not even close. Try again and use facts this time. Can you say
Brightpoint?

Remember that much of Radio Shacks business was in contract renewal, not
in new sales. And even when it was in new sales, the customer had
already decided which carrier to go with, and was simply looking for the
best deal, or the most convenient location at which to buy.
The sales that Verizon lost are the ones where the Radio Shack sales
person is able to convince the customer to change carriers away from
Verizon, over to Sprint or Cingular, or the rare new wireless customer.
No doubt that Verizon would have more net additions with Radio Shack
than without it. But the cost of these additions was not worth acceding
to Radio Shacks demands.
Furthermore, as Radio Shack continues to close stores, their value as
channel decreases. They're closing 480 stores this year, a little less
than 10% of their company-owned stores.

Just a random anecdotal data point.

It seemed that when I visited the Radio Shack store nearest to my house,
I was the only one buying non-cellular phone products. The rest were
milling about the cell phone displays, asking questions about cell
phones, buying cellphones and calling plans, buying cellphone
accessories, etc.

What do people buy at The Shack these days? I used to go for parts,
tools, browse their sometimes interesting books on electronics projects,
etc.

-jav

[SMS]

Post by Javier
What do people buy at The Shack these days?
etc.

Well that's the whole problem with Radio Shack these days. As fads
either end, or become mainstream (in which case every other store sells
the same products), Radio Shack loses out.

If you're buying new wireless service these days, the best place to buy
it is at Costco, for a lower price, and better warranty than the
carrier's own stores or from Radio Shack. And Costco dedicates about 75
square feet to do high volume sales from three different carriers. Radio
Shack has high cost leases and the expense of stocking a huge number of
low price SKUs that few people buy.

Radio Shack is adding wireless-only kiosks in some places, but it's too
little too late.

[Philip J. Koenig]

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 08:49:48 -0700, in article <4435389b$0$70812

Post by SMS
If you're buying new wireless service these days, the best place to buy
it is at Costco, for a lower price, and better warranty than the
carrier's own stores or from Radio Shack. And Costco dedicates about 75
square feet to do high volume sales from three different carriers. Radio
Shack has high cost leases and the expense of stocking a huge number of
low price SKUs that few people buy.

I was at Costco recently to look at cellphones/service for a
friend who was attracted to their "replacement" warranty. (despite
the fact that, in general, I despise that place)

First of all, Costco rents the kiosks to a 3rd party who actually
operates them.

Secondly, they have (as is usually the case at Costco) an extremely
limited collection of devices and accessories.

Thirdly, the salespeople are on commission and pushy.

Lastly, other than the Costco loss/damage warranty, the prices
on phones aren't that great, in many cases higher than the
carrier's company stores.

I also doubt that if what you want is "great service", you will
find it there, other than the replacement warranty, which I hear
has (unsurprisingly) a healthy list of qualifications and limitations.

Oh, and there is no way to call anyone there on the phone, you
have to make a trip down there if you want to talk to anyone.

No thanks. Personally I think I'd rather patronize Radio Shack
than Costco for a cellphone.

[SMS]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
Secondly, they have (as is usually the case at Costco) an extremely
limited collection of devices and accessories.

Yes, this is true. The handset selection is limited.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
Thirdly, the salespeople are on commission and pushy.

Hmm, which Costco was this. I've been to Mountain View and Sunnyvale,
and didn't experience this.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
Lastly, other than the Costco loss/damage warranty, the prices
on phones aren't that great, in many cases higher than the
carrier's company stores.

The price on the V276 I bought there was $25 less than the Verizon
store. -$25, versus $0 at the store (for a renewal under new every two).
Plus it includes a car charger, case, and headset, all low quality, but
similar to the Verizon after-market accessories.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
Oh, and there is no way to call anyone there on the phone, you
have to make a trip down there if you want to talk to anyone.

Not true. Call the main store number, and they'll give you the phone
number for the wireless kiosk. I did this.

[Malcolm Hoar]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
No thanks. Personally I think I'd rather patronize Radio Shack
than Costco for a cellphone.

My personal anecdote... Radio Shack is the *worst* place to buy
a cellphone. As best as I can tell, Radio Shack refer every
phone problem back to the cellphone manufacturer (even when the
Moto phone is packaged with a Radio Shack branded manual and
warranty statement).

Cingular/Verizon/TMobile stores as well as most small independent
will provide vastly better service in the event of a bad battery,
broken antenna or other common problem, based on my albeit
limited experience.

Radio Shack seem to think it's acceptable to tell the customer
to return the phone to the manufacturer for 6 weeks just to
get a warranty replacement of a bad battery. Fortunately,
other stores, from whom I had purchased nothing, were very
willing to help me out in the face of Radio Shack's refusal.
And yes, even the Shack's store manager and regional manager
steadfastly refused to help.

[SMS]

Post by Malcolm Hoar
My personal anecdote... Radio Shack is the *worst* place to buy
a cellphone. As best as I can tell, Radio Shack refer every
phone problem back to the cellphone manufacturer (even when the
Moto phone is packaged with a Radio Shack branded manual and
warranty statement).

In terms of obtaining service, Radio Shack is the worst. If you take a
Radio Shack purchased phone to one of the carrier's stores that has
level 2 service (where they can fix minor things like antenna
replacement, etc.), they won't touch it. You might find a Radio Shack
that has parts for the most popular phones, but it's unlikely.

The carriers give Radio Shack a sweet deal on pricing, because of their
volume, but they don't want their own stores to be servicing Radio
Shack's phones.

[Malcolm Hoar]

Post by SMS
In terms of obtaining service, Radio Shack is the worst. If you take a
Radio Shack purchased phone to one of the carrier's stores that has
level 2 service (where they can fix minor things like antenna
replacement, etc.), they won't touch it. You might find a Radio Shack
that has parts for the most popular phones, but it's unlikely.
The carriers give Radio Shack a sweet deal on pricing, because of their
volume, but they don't want their own stores to be servicing Radio
Shack's phones.

My experience is different. I've had no problems find non-Radio
Shack stores that will service Radio Shack sold phones.

I was just never able to get Radio Shack to service a Radio Shack
sold phone. And that sucks. Sending a phone back for factory repair
which may take 6 weeks also sucks. Therefore, don't buy a phone
from a store that doesn't offer a loaner in such situations.
Many do, but needless to say, Radio Shack is not one of those.

[Philip J. Koenig]

On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 17:56:37 GMT, in article

Post by Malcolm Hoar

Post by Philip J. Koenig
No thanks. Personally I think I'd rather patronize Radio Shack
than Costco for a cellphone.

My personal anecdote... Radio Shack is the *worst* place to buy
a cellphone. As best as I can tell, Radio Shack refer every
phone problem back to the cellphone manufacturer (even when the
Moto phone is packaged with a Radio Shack branded manual and
warranty statement).

In general, I think Radio Shack service sucks, not least
because the caliber of their employees tends to be pretty
low. Unfortunately, my experience with cellular retailers
as a whole is *worse*, in general. With Radio Shack, there
are vast differences from store-to-store. Some are actually
pretty great, others are pretty abysmal. Unfortunately the
abysmal side is more common - but like I said, cellular
retailers (particularly the independents) are pretty damn
low on the retail evolutionary scale in my experience.

Post by Malcolm Hoar
Cingular/Verizon/TMobile stores as well as most small independent
will provide vastly better service in the event of a bad battery,
broken antenna or other common problem, based on my albeit
limited experience.
Radio Shack seem to think it's acceptable to tell the customer
to return the phone to the manufacturer for 6 weeks just to
get a warranty replacement of a bad battery. Fortunately,
other stores, from whom I had purchased nothing, were very
willing to help me out in the face of Radio Shack's refusal.

I actually purchased a (SprintPCS) phone from Radio Shack
some years back. The experience was fine, although I must
admit that I didn't go back to them very much for support,
and when I really needed something, I went directly to the
SprintPCS store. (who were glad to help me out and didn't
care who I bought the phone from - despite the fact that,
in general, SprintPCS service overall was sucky.)

Post by Malcolm Hoar
And yes, even the Shack's store manager and regional manager
steadfastly refused to help.

That's a shame. No surprise you got soured on them.

These days many if not most national "tech retailers"
seem to be pretty bad, which is why I try to do business
with a good local company if I can. (A friend recently
had a crappy experience trying to buy a car stereo from
BestBuy, which led me to do some research on local dealers,
where we found basically the same unit for the same price
from a company whose service quality and overall attitude
were stellar by comparison.)

These days if I have a need to make a retail purchase of
a relatively common computer item and for some reason need
to patronize a national chain (ie they are closer, or have
an item in stock, or open at an hour when other choices are
not), I generally end up at an office-supply store like
Office Depot or OfficeMax where at least the staff tends to
be courteous and available and the store policies and
atmosphere are halfway-decent.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
These days if I have a need to make a retail purchase of
a relatively common computer item and for some reason need
to patronize a national chain (ie they are closer, or have
an item in stock, or open at an hour when other choices are
not), I generally end up at an office-supply store like
Office Depot or OfficeMax where at least the staff tends to
be courteous and available and the store policies and
atmosphere are halfway-decent.

YMMV -- I've had some pretty dismal experiences at the big office supply
stores in this area (East Bay, Tri-Valley), so I now tend to avoid them.

[Malcolm Hoar]

Post by John Navas
YMMV -- I've had some pretty dismal experiences at the big office supply
stores in this area (East Bay, Tri-Valley), so I now tend to avoid them.

Ditto for me. In recent years I've had a lot of success with
Walmart. They carry more products than one might expect.

Recently, I needed urgently a miniDV head cleaner. No luck
at my local Fry's, Radio Shack and several other stores but
Walmart had 'em on the shelf.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Malcolm Hoar

Post by John Navas
YMMV -- I've had some pretty dismal experiences at the big office supply
stores in this area (East Bay, Tri-Valley), so I now tend to avoid them.

Ditto for me. In recent years I've had a lot of success with
Walmart. They carry more products than one might expect.

Yep. And Home Depot, for cabling and accessories.

[Philip J. Koenig]

On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:15:12 GMT,

Post by John Navas

Post by Malcolm Hoar

Post by John Navas
YMMV -- I've had some pretty dismal experiences at the big office supply
stores in this area (East Bay, Tri-Valley), so I now tend to avoid them.

Ditto for me. In recent years I've had a lot of success with
Walmart. They carry more products than one might expect.

Yep. And Home Depot, for cabling and accessories.

Both of which have a "large selection".

And both of which:

- Tend to have poor / unavailable customer service
- Have a tendency to drive local retailers out of business
without replacing their unique value
- Have had significant or substantial labor problems or a
history of exploiting employees
- Have a tendency to only contribute to local communities
when forced to, and there is a high "sleaze factor". (HomeDepot
tried to pawn off some pretty big lies to get a store into
SF, for example)

I consistently prefer to do business with quality local
retailers unless the conditions I mentioned in my previous
post force me to do otherwise. I like the retail profit to
go to a local organization that invests in the local
community, and in return I generally get superior service
as well.

Getting back to the office store / computer store comparison
where we're talking strictly about national chains, I almost
always getter quicker, more courteous service in a less
aggravating environment when I go to Office Depot/Staples/
OfficeMax as compared to Frys/CompUSA/BestBuy, assuming all
the stores carry the item I'm looking for. (BestBuy is a
bit better than the other two, and MicroCenter is about the
best "superstore" for service in my experience)

YMMV of course, and there are always store-to-store variations.

[DecaturTxCowboy]

Both [Walmart & Home Depot]of which have a "large selection".
- Tend to have poor / unavailable customer service

Walmart really doesn't have any products that need knowledgeable sales
staff, but the paint and electronics departments seems to be the most
educated comparatively speaking to the rest of the store). Home Depot
and Lowes has each department specially trained. Ever see the pins on
the HD vests?

- Have a tendency to drive local retailers out of business
without replacing their unique value

No doubt. I can't see the local lumber store surviving. But then, the
store only has a very few items that the local Lowes didn't have,
Oh...forgot to check Tractor Supply. Besides, I'm past the leather and
metal fantasy stage.

- Have had significant or substantial labor problems or a
history of exploiting employees

No argument there as far as Walmart goes.

- Have a tendency to only contribute to local communities
when forced to, and there is a high "sleaze factor". (HomeDepot
tried to pawn off some pretty big lies to get a store into
SF, for example)

That may very well be in some cases, but from what I've seen when the
new kid on the block meets public opposition, they make concessions to
meet the communities concerns - like adding more trees, sound barrier
walls, improve street access to reduce traffic congestion - the you
could say the "sleaze factor" work for the community instead of against it.

I like the retail profit to
go to a local organization that invests in the local community,

In my local Walmart, there's a sign that says how much they contribute
to local organizations that could very well exceed what other merchants
put back in.

and in return I generally get superior service as well.

Which is easy to do when the local merchant has for or five floor staff
to handle the four or five customers in the store. That's an incredible
amount of staffing overhead per sales volume/floor space.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
- Have a tendency to drive local retailers out of business
without replacing their unique value

No doubt. I can't see the local lumber store surviving. ...

Those that have a sufficient value proposition can not only survive but do
well. Examples: Richert Lumber in Pleasanton <http://www.richertlumber.com/>,
Southern Lumber in San Jose <http://www.southernlumber.com/>.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
and in return I generally get superior service as well.

Which is easy to do when the local merchant has for or five floor staff
to handle the four or five customers in the store. That's an incredible
amount of staffing overhead per sales volume/floor space.

Inefficiency that's reflected in the price.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Philip J. Koenig
On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:15:12 GMT,

Post by John Navas

Post by Malcolm Hoar
Ditto for me. In recent years I've had a lot of success with
Walmart. They carry more products than one might expect.

Yep. And Home Depot, for cabling and accessories.

Both of which have a "large selection".

Both of which carry many of the most needed items. When I need something they
don't have, then of course I go somewhere else.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
- Tend to have poor / unavailable customer service

YMMV. Although customer service can be spotty in Walmart, I usually get good
customer service in Home Depot. Both are good on satisfaction guarantee and
return policy.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
- Have a tendency to drive local retailers out of business
without replacing their unique value

What they actually do is a better job of satisfying the market. Any
consequences on local retailers are a result of their effectiveness and
customer choices. Those with truly "unique value" can not only survive, but
thrive.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
- Have had significant or substantial labor problems or a
history of exploiting employees

That depends on your point of view. Both have many employees that are happy
with their jobs. Regardless, working there is a matter of choice.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
- Have a tendency to only contribute to local communities
when forced to, and there is a high "sleaze factor". (HomeDepot
tried to pawn off some pretty big lies to get a store into
SF, for example)

My own take is that they are no worse in general than most other businesses.
Many local businesses make no contribution at all to their local communities.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
I consistently prefer to do business with quality local
retailers unless the conditions I mentioned in my previous
post force me to do otherwise. I like the retail profit to
go to a local organization that invests in the local
community, and in return I generally get superior service
as well.

My practice is to use the retailer (brick and mortar or online) that is the
best value proposition (including service) for any given purchase. That might
be Walmart or Home Depot or Costco, or it might be a local retailer, like my
favorite coffee place (Pacific Bay Coffee <http://pacificbaycoffee.com/>).
That helps the market to work effectively. The challenge for local retailers,
just like local ISPs, is to offer a sufficient value proposition to justify
their existence. Warm and nice isn't usually enough. My favorite coffee
place has no problem competing with the likes of Starbucks and Peets. It
notably isn't competing by matching prices.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
Getting back to the office store / computer store comparison
where we're talking strictly about national chains,

Likewise Pacific Electronics in Dublin. Likewise NCAL Computer in Pleasanton
<http://www.ncalcomputers.com/>. Purely local retailers with a sufficient
value proposition to justify their existence. And Frys isn't a true national
chain.

Post by Philip J. Koenig
I almost
always getter quicker, more courteous service in a less
aggravating environment when I go to Office Depot/Staples/
OfficeMax as compared to Frys/CompUSA/BestBuy, assuming all
the stores carry the item I'm looking for. (BestBuy is a
bit better than the other two, and MicroCenter is about the
best "superstore" for service in my experience)
YMMV of course, and there are always store-to-store variations.

My experience in my area (East Bay, Tri-Valley) is that the national office
supply chains generally have poorer customer service than the big
computer/electronics chains (Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA).

[Rico]

Post by SMS

Post by Javier
What do people buy at The Shack these days?
etc.

Well that's the whole problem with Radio Shack these days. As fads
either end, or become mainstream (in which case every other store sells
the same products), Radio Shack loses out.
If you're buying new wireless service these days, the best place to buy
it is at Costco, for a lower price, and better warranty than the
carrier's own stores or from Radio Shack. And Costco dedicates about 75
square feet to do high volume sales from three different carriers. Radio
Shack has high cost leases and the expense of stocking a huge number of
low price SKUs that few people buy.
Radio Shack is adding wireless-only kiosks in some places, but it's too
little too late.

Did you know Costco is not all over the country (US)?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[SMS]

Post by Rico
Did you know Costco is not all over the country (US)?

Sadly, I realize this. Still, they're in most metro areas. I have also
been to Costco in Taiwan (GSM) and Korea (CDMA). The Korea Costco's have
the best food and drink samples, including Korean beef and kimchi, as
well as beer (hof) and Korean rice wine (SoJu). The food sample servers
are also very different than in the U.S..

[Rico]

Post by SMS

Post by Rico
Did you know Costco is not all over the country (US)?

Sadly, I realize this. Still, they're in most metro areas.

Don't get east of the left coast much do you...

Post by SMS
I have also
been to Costco in Taiwan (GSM) and Korea (CDMA). The Korea Costco's have
the best food and drink samples, including Korean beef and kimchi, as
well as beer (hof) and Korean rice wine (SoJu). The food sample servers
are also very different than in the U.S..

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[SMS]

Post by Rico

Post by SMS

Post by Rico
Did you know Costco is not all over the country (US)?

Sadly, I realize this. Still, they're in most metro areas.

Don't get east of the left coast much do you...

Sure I do. I went to Costcos in Brooklyn and near College Park MD, in
February, and I've been to them in Atlanta, Minneapolis, and Fort
Lauderdale as well.

[Rico]

Post by Javier

Post by SMS

Post by Scott
Not even close. Try again and use facts this time. Can you say
Brightpoint?

Remember that much of Radio Shacks business was in contract renewal, not
in new sales. And even when it was in new sales, the customer had
already decided which carrier to go with, and was simply looking for the
best deal, or the most convenient location at which to buy.
The sales that Verizon lost are the ones where the Radio Shack sales
person is able to convince the customer to change carriers away from
Verizon, over to Sprint or Cingular, or the rare new wireless customer.
No doubt that Verizon would have more net additions with Radio Shack
than without it. But the cost of these additions was not worth acceding
to Radio Shacks demands.
Furthermore, as Radio Shack continues to close stores, their value as
channel decreases. They're closing 480 stores this year, a little less
than 10% of their company-owned stores.

Just a random anecdotal data point.
It seemed that when I visited the Radio Shack store nearest to my house,
I was the only one buying non-cellular phone products. The rest were
milling about the cell phone displays, asking questions about cell
phones, buying cellphones and calling plans, buying cellphone
accessories, etc.
What do people buy at The Shack these days?

Batterys, or at least the last time I was there that was what the bulk of
the 'crowd' in the store was there for. Again no claim of this being an
accurate survey of the typical client at the shack. I still use them for
the occasional part etc especially on weekends when some of the bigger
parts houses are closed (locally). I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Post by Javier
I used to go for parts,
tools, browse their sometimes interesting books on electronics projects,
etc.
-jav

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[SMS]

Rico wrote:

<snip>

Post by Rico
I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Not sure where you are, but in the Bay Area they are closing six out of
122 stores, in Hayward, Alameda, Newark, San Jose, Richmond and Marin. I
think what helped keep the total down is that so many of their Bay Area
stores have closed already. Near my house, we've lost four out of six
stores in the past ten years or so. Unless Radio Shack finds a way to
get Verizon back, the 480 stores is just the beginning.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
<snip>

Post by Rico
I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Not sure where you are, but in the Bay Area they are closing six out of
122 stores, in Hayward, Alameda, Newark, San Jose, Richmond and Marin. I
think what helped keep the total down is that so many of their Bay Area
stores have closed already. Near my house, we've lost four out of six
stores in the past ten years or so. Unless Radio Shack finds a way to
get Verizon back, the 480 stores is just the beginning.

How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel) are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.

And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

[SMS]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.

And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve. As all of the reports have stated,
wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
Verizon.

I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. Year after year,
Consumer Reports lists Verizon as the top carrier in almost every
metropolitan area. The surveys' impact is not limited to CR subscribers,
as it is widely quoted by the media around the country. Since most
wireless subscribers are already less than thrilled with their service,
when their contract is up, they tend to do more research when selecting
a carrier the second time.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.

And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve.

So you say, but there doesn't seem to be anything to support you.

Post by SMS
As all of the reports have stated,
wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
Verizon.

Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here) have
stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling Verizon
back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from those
problems.

Post by SMS
I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. ...

Nonsense.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.

And yet no proof of your stupid and silly claim- how silly.

Talk to a Radio Shack manager or franchise owner sometime about the loss
of Verizon, you'll touch a nerve.

So you say, but there doesn't seem to be anything to support you.

Just following your lead- you have only opined on the subject.

Post by John Navas

Post by SMS
As all of the reports have stated,
wireless sales have taken a big hit at Radio Shack since the loss of
Verizon.

Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here) have
stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling Verizon
back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from those
problems.

And yet they actively advertise Sprint products. I guess your opinion of
the RS plan is wrong.

Post by John Navas

Post by SMS
I think one of the biggest problems for retailers that don't sell
Verizon, is the tremendous influence that surveys such as those from
Consumer Reports and JD Power have on consumers. ...

Nonsense.
--

Proof?

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
Nope. The actual reports (the chronology of which I've detailed here) have
stated that wireless was in trouble at the Shack when it was selling Verizon
back in 2005. Switching to Cingular is part of the plan to recover from those
problems.

And yet they actively advertise Sprint products. I guess your opinion of
the RS plan is wrong.

The RS plan is to fix disappointing sales of Sprint-Nextel products, as shown
in my earlier post.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel) are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel) are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
Phones & Radio Communications page.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business
model
for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and
Sprint-Nextel)
are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
Phones & Radio Communications page.

And their new TV ad features a Sprint phone. I wonder which one they spent
more money on- the webpage or the commercial?

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business
model
for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and
Sprint-Nextel)
are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

Maybe they already found the solution- I just saw one of the new national
Radio Shack TV ads. Great promo for one of the Sprint phones.

Radio Shack home page features Motorola L6 on Cingular. Also the
Phones & Radio Communications page.

And their new TV ad features a Sprint phone. I wonder which one they spent
more money on- the webpage or the commercial?

Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the
problem:

<http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/special_packages/sprint/13614132.htm>:

RADIOSHACK BLUES TIED TO SPRINT NEXTEL
CEO blames profit shortfall on lag in wireless sales

The chief executive of RadioShack Corp. was singing the Sprint Nextel
Corp. blues Thursday.

The Texas-based electronics retailer said fourth-quarter profits
would fall short because Sprint and Nextel wireless sales failed to
boom toward the end of the year.

RadioShack was counting heavily on extra Sprint sales as the company
shifted away from Verizon Wireless. A new contract with Cingular
Wireless did not begin until January, David Edmondson, RadioShack’s
president and chief executive officer, said during a call with Wall
Street analysts.

"That was our contingency plan -- to drive the Sprint piece harder --
and that’s the part that did not materialize," Edmondson said.

[MORE]

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the

You mean Radio Shack said in early January that the 4th quarter of 2005 (the
first with Nextel products available) was disappointing. Not surprising,
given the fact that they were still selling Verizon at that time. Your
article is horribly out-of-date and does not come remotely close to
representing the current business environment. It certainly has no bearing
on the sudden interest in advertising Sprint products almost 4 months after
the period mentioned in the article had passed. To say the advertising is a
reaction to poor 4Q sales is extremely short-sighted and exposes fundamental
flaws and gaps in your knowledge and understanding of business and
advertising- further proof that Google is not the best place to learn an
industry.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the

You mean Radio Shack said in early January that the 4th quarter of 2005 (the
first with Nextel products available) was disappointing. Not surprising,
given the fact that they were still selling Verizon at that time.
[SNIP]

Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

They were? Verizon was featured on the website and in their advertising in
4Q as they worked to get rid of as much VZW inventory as they could prior to
the deal ending. The SprintNextel deal was signed to be the substitute for
the VZW loss and become their CDMA carrier of the future. This doesn't even
take into account that Sprint was still fighting image issues at the end of
'05- image problems that seem to be healing as they scream past Cingular in
their integration efforts. Image problems that pale in comparison to the
well documented problems that Cingular has created for themselves over the
last year and a half. Becoming the number two carrier after holding such
command of the industry customer base (yet one of the least profitable) at
the time of the merger speaks volumes and being number three by the end of
'06 will make Cingular an afterthought to most customers. And this will
happen because Cingular offers NOTHING unique- Verizon has network, T-Mo has
pricing, SprintNextel has PTT and business applications. Cingular is simply
a cellular provider with no unique identifier- kind of the Radio Shack of
cellular providers. Maybe they deserve each other.

Post by John Navas
Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

And you shouldn't expect to be taken seriously until you learn how to
seperate opinion from fact when posting and not state poorly researched
opinion as fact. I said nothing childish and stand by my statements- to say
the advertising is a reaction to poor 4Q sales is extremely short-sighted
and exposes fundamental flaws and gaps in your knowledge and understanding
of business and advertising. Companies do not react four months after the
fact with featured advertising to support a poor selling commissioned
product, particularly if they have a more successful and profitable channel
to support, as you claim. This opinion of yours (which is very well
documented in this newsgroup) when combined with your predictable reaction
to my comments does expose flaws and gaps in your knowledge.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by John Navas
Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

[SNIP unsupported comments]

Post by John Navas
Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

[SNIP unsupported comments and personal attacks]

I didn't think so, but thanks anyway for living down to my expectations.
Don't expect anything further from me unless and until you come up with
something (anything) credible. In the meantime, have a nice day.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
20:52:55 -0600,

Post by John Navas
Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

[SNIP unsupported comments]

Unsupported claims? You must have been confused for a moment, John- you
were responding to my comments, not your own. But I'll play your game- what
kind of facts would you like to prove that RS was still aggressively selling
and advertising VZW right up until the end of '05?

Post by John Navas

Post by John Navas
Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

[SNIP unsupported comments and personal attacks]

And your comments above are what? I see- dish it out but can't take it.
Why doesn't that surprise me? But again, I'll play your little game- which
comments are unsupported? I'll be glad to support them using your own words
and "experiences".

Post by John Navas
I didn't think so, but thanks anyway for living down to my expectations.
Don't expect anything further from me unless and until you come up with
something (anything) credible. In the meantime, have a nice day.

The only thing I expect from you anytime I come to this group is bad
information and I expect to see a lot more of it. As far as credible posts,
you wouldn't know one if it were the only post to read- your opinion of me
will never make me lose sleep.

[k***@sonic.net]

On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 03:20:01 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by John Navas
Actually very surprising, and disappointing, since they were pushing
Sprint-Nextel at the time, were expecting new sales from picking up Nextel,
and since Verizon sales were down as well.

[SNIP unsupported comments]

Post by John Navas
Don't expect to be taken seriously unless and until you come up with something
(anything) credible to rebut that (and learn to cut down on your usual
childish attacks).

[SNIP unsupported comments and personal attacks]

I didn't think so, but thanks anyway for living down to my expectations.
Don't expect anything further from me unless and until you come up with
something (anything) credible. In the meantime, have a nice day.

Fat chance -- it's well known that JN is incapable of stopping
once you've set the hook.

[Malcolm Hoar]

Post by John Navas
Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the

So what are we witnessing here?

1. A Verizon problem?
2. A Sprint-Nextel problem?
3. A Radio Shack problem?

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Malcolm Hoar

Post by John Navas
Radio Shack stated earlier this year that Sprint-Nextel sales haven't lived up
to expectations, so it's not terribly surprising that it's trying to fix the

So what are we witnessing here?
1. A Verizon problem?
2. A Sprint-Nextel problem?
3. A Radio Shack problem?

3.

[Charles]

Post by Malcolm Hoar
3. A Radio Shack problem?

Closing 500 stores. CEO resigned for falsifying resume. They have been
having problems.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Charles

Post by Malcolm Hoar
3. A Radio Shack problem?

Closing 500 stores. CEO resigned for falsifying resume. They have been
having problems.

which have nothing to do with any wireless carrier, not Cingular, not Verizon,
not Sprint-Nextel. All this is just a result of childish attempts to blame
Cingular for poor results actually caused by bad management at the Shack.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
All this is just a result of childish attempts to blame
Cingular for poor results actually caused by bad management at the Shack.
--

Wrong again- you have represented Cingular as the second coming for Radio
Shack and left essential facts out when discussing the collapse of the
Verizon deal. You have once again poorly twisted and misrepresented
internet findings, providing your "take" on what they are really saying, as
opposed to letting the articles speak for themselves. You have posted links
that once researched have no value at all in the discussion at hand, but
allow you to reference the links as "proof" that you are right. And now you
are claiming that the recent advertising of Sprint productrs is a result of
poor sales almost a half year ago. You have a track record of being wrong
and refusing to admit it.

EVERYBODY EXCEPT YOU that has posted direct personal information in this
thread has said that Radio Shack employees are far from pleased with the
performance of Cingular in the stores. A sane and rational person in that
position would look at the facts (no matter how presented) and either shut
up or readjust their way of thinking. A sane and rational person would not
state opinion as fact and blur the facts ad nauseum to win at all costs.
You simply dimiss it as unverifiable heresay and then post your own
observations as irrefutable fact. You are the hypocrite's hypocrite.

Now- because you are predictable and are bound to call everything I've just
posted a juvelnile attack, I'll show you a juvenile attack. You have no
clue about 95% of the things you post about. You had your 15 minutes of
fame so long ago that the knowledge that got you that fame is now taught at
most Junior High schools as antiquated technological history. Your
"jack-of-all-trades, master of none" approach to "enlightening" people in
these NG's is only surpassed in quantity by the huge amount of incorrect and
useless "facts" and opinions you shower us with. Shall I point out the
threads where you stick your head in the sand and hide (never to be seen
again) when outed as clueless about the subject at hand? You are the most
dangerous kind of poster Usenet could ever have- somebody armed with poor or
bad information that posts it because it sounds good, not having a clue
about the subject at hand. You should add a new sig to your posts- "I'm
John Navas, dammit. Why would you believe me?"

So there ya go, Johnny Boy. Knowing you, you'll not only call it juvenile
but scream "slander" at the same time. Feel free to do either- everything I
posted is well documented and supported by your own posts over the last five
years. You see, Google is my friend.

[SMS]

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
All this is just a result of childish attempts to blame
Cingular for poor results actually caused by bad management at the Shack.
--

Wrong again- you have represented Cingular as the second coming for Radio

<snip>

Post by Scott
EVERYBODY EXCEPT YOU that has posted direct personal information in this
thread has said that Radio Shack employees are far from pleased with the
performance of Cingular in the stores. A sane and rational person in that

<snip>

Post by Scott
So there ya go, Johnny Boy. Knowing you, you'll not only call it juvenile
but scream "slander" at the same time. Feel free to do either- everything I
posted is well documented and supported by your own posts over the last five
years. You see, Google is my friend.

Nice long post Scott, but by now surely you must realize that, in the
words of Eric Hauser, "You can't have a debate with someone who is
willing to make up the facts."

[Scott]

Post by SMS
Nice long post Scott, but by now surely you must realize that, in the
words of Eric Hauser, "You can't have a debate with someone who is willing
to make up the facts."

Yeah, I know. He'll ignore it anyway- too much truth in it to suit his
agenda.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]
Nice long post Scott, but by now surely you must realize that, in the
words of Eric Hauser, "You can't have a debate with someone who is
willing to make up the facts."

The master should of course know. ;)

[DecaturTxCowboy]

Post by John Navas
The master should of course know. ;)

OK, you got the last word in. Now go play with your PS2 and learn something.

[k***@sonic.net]

On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:35:06 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]
Nice long post Scott, but by now surely you must realize that, in the
words of Eric Hauser, "You can't have a debate with someone who is
willing to make up the facts."

The master should of course know. ;)

Another infantile variation.

[Philip J. Koenig]

On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 21:23:38 -0600,

Post by Scott

Post by John Navas
All this is just a result of childish attempts to blame
Cingular for poor results actually caused by bad management at the Shack.
--

Wrong again- you have represented Cingular as the second coming for Radio
Shack and left essential facts out when discussing the collapse of the
Verizon deal. You have once again poorly twisted and misrepresented
internet findings, providing your "take" on what they are really saying,

[...]

Post by Scott
You have a track record of being wrong and refusing to admit it.
EVERYBODY EXCEPT YOU that has posted direct personal information in this
thread has said that Radio Shack employees are far from pleased with the
performance of Cingular in the stores. A sane and rational person in that
position would look at the facts (no matter how presented) and either shut
up or readjust their way of thinking. A sane and rational person would not
state opinion as fact and blur the facts ad nauseum to win at all costs.
You simply dimiss it as unverifiable heresay and then post your own
observations as irrefutable fact. You are the hypocrite's hypocrite.

[...]

Post by Scott
You have no clue about 95% of the things you post about.

Actually I would argue that he has a clue on many things, but his
overwhelming need to be "right" and "the expert, along with an
extreme aversion to admitting error (or that someone has actually
taught him something), continually forces him into a rhetorical
corner. Thus if someone confronts him with incontrovertible
contradictory facts, he has a tendency to desperately twist and
selectively present facts to fit the pre-determined conclusion,
lest he be faced with the nightmarish shame of admitting he was
wrong in some way.

Post by Scott
Your "jack-of-all-trades, master of none" approach to "enlightening" people in
these NG's is only surpassed in quantity by the huge amount of incorrect and
useless "facts" and opinions you shower us with. Shall I point out the
threads where you stick your head in the sand and hide (never to be seen
again) when outed as clueless about the subject at hand? You are the most
dangerous kind of poster Usenet could ever have- somebody armed with poor or
bad information that posts it because it sounds good, not having a clue
about the subject at hand. You should add a new sig to your posts- "I'm
John Navas, dammit. Why would you believe me?"

I'm still waiting for JN to disprove the mathematical
formulas I posted in a recent thread where he tried
to claim that the differences in effective geographical
cell-site coverage between 800Mhz cellular and 1900Mhz
cellular were essentially nonexistent.

He has no rebuttal to that, of course, because as you said
pertaining to your experiences in a different newsgroup than
ba.internet where the thread mentioned was limited to, he
has a tendency to hide and go silent when his assertions are
so thoroughly disproven without any hope of reviving them with
the usual bluster and spin, rather than - *gasp* - actually
admitting he may have erred or has limited knowledge on the
subject.

The fact that he can be seen studiously "coming to the
defense" of a particular cellular carrier, time-after-time-
after-time, with virtually no balancing discussion coming
from him at any time that might cast any but that particular
carrier in a favorable light, makes the ruse all the more
transparent and "John Navas'ish".

(FWIW, this pattern goes back 10+ years, before he newgrouped
alt.cellular.cingular and way before Cingular even existed)

When the time comes, history has shown that he will at some
point become disgruntled with his "vendor du jour", throw a
bunch of bluster and recriminations around about the failure
of this former "vendor du jour", and once he has made it
clear that they have fallen-from-grace, he will with great
fanfare find a new "prom queen", and the process starts anew.

Here is the chronology of how this process occurred in the
case of internet providers over the last 12 or so years:

1) Ccnet
2) Netcom
3) Aimnet/Verio
4) TCI/ATT/Comcast
5) SBC
6) Sonic.net
6a) Cingular Media.net/EDGE


(Currently the honeymoon is over with Sonic.net, and he's
begun his "sniping" stage. He still uses them for some things,
but every chance he gets he ridicules them and makes a point to
mention that he has started using other providers for certain
services. Pretty soon another "prom queen" will be announced.
One of the candidates might have been Cingular's HSDPA service,
but since he can no longer find a way to get it cheap enough,
it may have to wait.)

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP wildly inaccurate content]

Not even remotely accurate, so I'm not going to bother responding, much less
be so childish as to respond in kind. Have a nice day.

[Rico]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS
<snip>

Post by Rico
I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Not sure where you are, but in the Bay Area they are closing six out of
122 stores, in Hayward, Alameda, Newark, San Jose, Richmond and Marin. I
think what helped keep the total down is that so many of their Bay Area
stores have closed already. Near my house, we've lost four out of six
stores in the past ten years or so. Unless Radio Shack finds a way to
get Verizon back, the 480 stores is just the beginning.

How silly -- Verizon was part of the problem (in 2005), not the solution.
Radio Shack needs to find a different and more sustainable business model for
its stores. Its cellular kiosks (now carrying Cingular and Sprint-Nextel) are
reportedly working well, but the store model is still clearly broken --
cellular and batteries aren't able to carry the freight alone.

I wonder if adding a similar line to the old heath kit business would help
get the hobbiest back or is it too late?

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Rico

Post by Javier
What do people buy at The Shack these days?

Batterys, or at least the last time I was there that was what the bulk of
the 'crowd' in the store was there for. Again no claim of this being an
accurate survey of the typical client at the shack. I still use them for
the occasional part etc especially on weekends when some of the bigger
parts houses are closed (locally). I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Cables, especially odd combinations (e.g., 15' male stereo mini jack to male
RCA plugs) that aren't readily available locally someplace else. And yes, the
occasional cellular accessory -- couple of friends got great deals on
Bluetooth headsets in Radio Shack sales.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Rico

Post by Javier
What do people buy at The Shack these days?

Batterys, or at least the last time I was there that was what the bulk of
the 'crowd' in the store was there for. Again no claim of this being an
accurate survey of the typical client at the shack. I still use them for
the occasional part etc especially on weekends when some of the bigger
parts houses are closed (locally). I personally am hoping the store near me
isn't one of the 480 that are mentioned in this thread.

Cables, especially odd combinations (e.g., 15' male stereo mini jack to male
RCA plugs) that aren't readily available locally someplace else. And yes, the
occasional cellular accessory -- couple of friends got great deals on
Bluetooth headsets in Radio Shack sales.
--

Interesting- you claim that they are the biggest distributor in the nation,
but cellphones don't make your list. Backing away from your false claim?

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Rico

Post by Philip J. Koenig
On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:13:43 GMT, in article <XnmYf.51577$2O6.38651
@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, Quick writes...
Either that or Verizon (like many corporations) is just trying
to spin a bad situation as positive, to lessen the negative
PR impact.

I can't imagine Verizon cares one way or 'ther what happens to Radio Shack.

Say what? Radio Shack is probably the biggest cellular distribution operation
in the USA. Replacing those sales won't be easy.

Bigger than Walmart? Best Buy? Try again, Novice.

[j***@sonic.net]

Post by Jeff Liebermann
Incidentally, the junk flush cutting diagonal cutters I purchased for
$5 were dull out of the box. They couldn't even cut CAT5 wires
without mushrooming the ends. I had to file an edge, but it was dull
after about 10 cuts. Not even hardened steel. The previous model
flush cutters were much better, sharp, and cheaper.

Thanks for that warning shot. I've used their dykes in the past and found
them fairly good. I'll avoid the latest. I hate poor quality tools.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by j***@sonic.net

Post by Jeff Liebermann
Incidentally, the junk flush cutting diagonal cutters I purchased for
$5 were dull out of the box. They couldn't even cut CAT5 wires
without mushrooming the ends. I had to file an edge, but it was dull
after about 10 cuts. Not even hardened steel. The previous model
flush cutters were much better, sharp, and cheaper.

Thanks for that warning shot. I've used their dykes in the past and found
them fairly good. I'll avoid the latest. I hate poor quality tools.

I'm equally disappointed with what Sears has done to Craftsman.
I've been happy with Home Depot's own Husky brand hand tools.

[Javier]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by j***@sonic.net

Post by Jeff Liebermann
Incidentally, the junk flush cutting diagonal cutters I purchased for
$5 were dull out of the box. They couldn't even cut CAT5 wires
without mushrooming the ends. I had to file an edge, but it was dull
after about 10 cuts. Not even hardened steel. The previous model
flush cutters were much better, sharp, and cheaper.

Thanks for that warning shot. I've used their dykes in the past and found
them fairly good. I'll avoid the latest. I hate poor quality tools.

I'm equally disappointed with what Sears has done to Craftsman.
I've been happy with Home Depot's own Husky brand hand tools.

A year ago, I bought a set of Husky screwdrivers. They're fine for light
duty (put a computer together) but trying to use a #2 Philips to unscrew
a stuck screw resulted in an eroded tip. Same result I got from recent
vintage Craftsman screwdrivers.

That same day I flagged down the Snap-On truck that was driving past my
hangar, and got a screwdriver from him. I'm guessing I will be able to
pry a locomotive off the rails with it and it will still look like new.

-jav

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO ba.internet - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Javier

Post by John Navas
I'm equally disappointed with what Sears has done to Craftsman.
I've been happy with Home Depot's own Husky brand hand tools.

A year ago, I bought a set of Husky screwdrivers. They're fine for light
duty (put a computer together) but trying to use a #2 Philips to unscrew
a stuck screw resulted in an eroded tip. Same result I got from recent
vintage Craftsman screwdrivers.

Hmmm... Checked my Husky tools, which have held up to hard use very well,
much better than classic Craftsman, and I see they are Husky Pro (HUSKYPRO).
Perhaps that makes a difference.

Post by Javier
That same day I flagged down the Snap-On truck that was driving past my
hangar, and got a screwdriver from him. I'm guessing I will be able to
pry a locomotive off the rails with it and it will still look like new.

Snap-on is a great name, but I think quality has slipped a bit in recent
years, making the price premium harder to justify. FWIW I recently had to
replace a Snap-on ratchet. Mac and Matco are better value IM(ns)HO.

[Rico]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by SMS

Post by Tinman
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!
==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...

"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_ho
me_down&chan=db"

Post by SMS

Post by Tinman
==========================================
You are at least useful for entertainment value, John. Really, you
should go into comedy or something...

Radio Shack is closing 480 stores, their stock has been downgraded
because of the loss of Verizon wireless sales, and has hit a 52 week
low. No way to spin this into something positive, but I expect that
he'll try.

Hardly positive. Radio is the victim of its own mismanagement, and is on a
long downhill slide. As shown in my other response here, problems stem in
part from poor sales of *Verizon* in *2005*. Switching to Cingular is
actually part of the turnaround plan. No matter how you try to spin it.

John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?
fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

While I haven't heard anything definitive, I think it's a good bet that
Cingular will be renamed to (the new) at&t if and when the merger is
completed.

[DecaturTxCowboy]

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.

Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

[Javier]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

How do you know it was a 20-something marketeer who decided on the logo
change? Do you have any evidence to support that claim or is it just
"gut feel"?

-jav

[Rico]

Post by Javier

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

How do you know it was a 20-something marketeer who decided on the logo
change? Do you have any evidence to support that claim or is it just
"gut feel"?

Not much experienece with the advertising world, when you're thirty (if you
aren't senior management or out on your own) you're through.

Post by Javier
-jav

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[Plonk]

Reminds me, gotta add "nayas" to my filters. . .

Post by Javier

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T
after the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

How do you know it was a 20-something marketeer who decided on the logo
change? Do you have any evidence to support that claim or is it just "gut
feel"?
-jav

[JohnF]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

Complete fantasy!

[Rico]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by DecaturTxCowboy

Post by Rico
John, Have you heard whether or not cingular will be renamed to AT&T after
the Atlanta take over?

Since the industry magazines were talking about the advantages the brand
recognition factor of AT&T over Cingular, its a pretty good bet the name
and orange jumping jack guy will go.
Have you noticed on the AT&T website, the harsh look of the their
"Deathstar" (Star Wars) logo was replaced by a more friendly jumping
jack ball logo?

Shows how dumb 20-something marketing "experts" can be, trading the value of
strong and well-established branding for a trendy new look that will look
dated in no time.

You mean they aren't going back to the blue bell?!?!? I think maybe I
should plan to attend the next shareholders meeting (wonder if you can get
inside if your own one lot <wink/>).

fundamentalism, fundamentally wrong.

[John Navas]

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Tinman
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!
==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...
"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db"
==========================================

Radio Shack dumped Verizon in favor of Cingular due to poor wireless results
in *2005*. It is the victim of its own poor management, not either wireless
carrier, and on a long downhill slide:

<http://biz.yahoo.com/fool/060112/113708679513.html?.v=1>

Motley Fool
RadioShack Losing Power
Thursday January 12, 12:26 pm ET

It's been a tough year for the Shack. Almost a year ago to the day,
the company said it was confident that it would see 20% earnings
growth over 2004's results, but the euphoria was short-lived. Just
two months later, the company's sales fell; it realized that it would
miss its first-quarter forecasts, and possibly its full-year
predictions. It's been dialing down expectations all year long.

<http://yahoo.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompanyNewsArticle.aspx?storyID=...>

LIFTING THE LID: RadioShack under pressure after CEO admission
Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:48 PM ET

NEW YORK, Feb 17 (Reuters) - The code of conduct at RadioShack
Corp.(RSH.N: Quote, Profile, Research) is quite explicit. On its Web
site and under the name of its CEO David Edmondson the electronics
retailer says staff should "do the right thing, even when no one is
watching."

But after several days of negative news, much of it centered on
Edmondson's behavior and admission that he lied on his resume,
corporate governance experts are asking whether RadioShack and
Edmondson will stick to their own mantra.

"I don't know how you can characterize the tone at the top at this
company as encouraging accountability and doing the right thing when
nobody's looking if Mr. Edmondson continues as CEO, and there appears
to be no consequences for what he's done," said Beth Young, research
associate at The Corporate Library, a corporate governance research
group.

Earlier this week, Edmondson admitted that he "clearly" misstated his
academic record and that his resume was wrong. While he originally
said he received a Bachelor of Science degree, he now says he
believes he received a ThG diploma, awarded for completing a
three-year degree in theology, but adds that he cannot document that.

Edmondson, who was RadioShack's president and chief operating
officer, became chief executive officer last May.

The disclosure prompted the consumer electronics retailer's board to
hire a lawyer to investigate the matter.

The management issues were minimized on Friday, however, when the
company posted a 62 percent drop in quarterly profits and outlined a
plan to try to get its business back on track.

...

Senior executives then launched a roughly 3-hour long presentation,
broadcast over the Internet, discussing the earnings results and
turnaround plan, which could cost up to $100 million and close up to
700 stores.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Post by Tinman
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 18:45:30 GMT, John Navas

Post by John Navas

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack?

ROFLMAO!
==========================================
RadioShack Shares Hit Low on Downgrade
APR. 3 10:26 A.M. ET
Shares of RadioShack Corp. hit a 52-week low on Monday after an analyst
said the electronics retailer's transition to selling Cingular products
appeared to be "more difficult" than expected, and downgraded the
stock...
"http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8GOJ1BG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db"
==========================================

Radio Shack dumped Verizon in favor of Cingular due to poor wireless results
in *2005*.

<snip the unrelated drivel>

And yet NONE of your cites back up this claim- how strange.

[Scott]

Post by John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

[SNIP]

My goodness, Steven, that's an amazing amount of time and effort by someone
that professes to ignore me. :) Guess I must have really touched a nerve.
Was is because of exposing some of your wilder claims? How wrong you were
about Radio Shack? NTP vs. RIM? Cingular GSM migration? Some other wild
claim? All of the above? :)

Or could it be that he wrote this for the amusement of those of us who
recognize you for the buffoon you truly are?

[DecaturTxCowboy]

Post by Scott
Or could it be that he wrote this for the amusement of those of us who
recognize you for the buffoon you truly are?

DING DING DING DING...We have a winner!